What can RAF learn from Russia's lack of air superiority in Ukraine?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.พ. 2024
- Russia's vast air force was supposed to crush Ukraine in a matter of days.
But that air superiority never came, thanks in large part to Western air defence systems.
Forces News has spoken to a former deputy commander of RAF Air Command to see whether there are any lessons the Royal Air Force can draw from the conflict two years on.
More: www.forces.net/ukraine/russia...
#forcesnews #news #russia #ukraine #airforce #weapons
Subscribe to Forces News: bit.ly/1OraazC
Check out our website: www.forces.net/
Facebook: / forcestv
Instagram: forcesnews...
X: / forcesnews
What's amazing is that the UK does not have any strategic air defence systems that are land based. Completely wild
Clearly you haven't seen us throw a stale scone in anger! We get them pretty high up there
The UK has MAD instead and anyway the UK has thousands of MANPADS which is much better becasue it is impossible to destroy hand held systems, they can easily be moved and deployed anywhere. The UK air defense is one of the best in the world as it is 100% mobile and impossible to destroy. A unit spread out over a few miles with MANPADS can destroy dozens of the best aircraft the world has in short order and in second after firing move to another position miles away, DEADLY.
@@drscopeify The range of MANPADS is very short, Russian aircraft would easily fly outside the range of MANPADS and deploy cruise missiles and glide bombs, just like they have been doing in Ukraine. The UK is relying mostly on the air force and navy to counter aerial threats, which Ukraine lacks. But the UK is also a NATO member, so NATO defines what the sector needs in terms of aerial defense, and is capable of transferring Patriot systems as an additional measure to fully close the skies.
The trident exercise is a classical example of their sea superiority😂😂😂
If you are thinking about mid- and long-range air defense systems, then those would mostly have to be sea borne anyway. The UK is an archipelago, and the closest land masses are allied. It makes much more sense to invest in an air force that can come out and meet the enemy bombers or fighter aircraft.
@ 2:24. Surrounded by computer stuff, gets the slide rule out 🤣😂.
I came here to comment,
At least the HMSQE uses W95
New Ruzzian analog flight computer! Never need battery! Waterproof! Shockproof! Vodkaproof! Can also smack copilot with! Round model in develop!
@@richardpark3054Russia loves low tech ,remember they used pencils in their space missions . the Americans wasted money on developing a pen which would work in zero gravity !
Saw that. Anti-EMP device? 😊
channels like this are the reason some people still think ukraine is totally fine
Im from the UK and it amazes me how many people are just brain washed by anti-russian propaganda, they really believe everything the main stream news tells them about russia and the war.
delusional doesn`t come close!!
Russia is winning in the attrition war, they can throw meat and equipment into the grinder like there is no tomorrow. That is their only and biggest advantage unfortunately. Ukraine is on a timer we all know this, however Russia will never take Ukraine. Also you sound a bit like a Russia troll by your very simplistic way you approach this issue.
@@waynus2021 They are seriously in awe of their own propaganda here, ain't they. Western junk, blown to pieces on a regular basis. We should be spending money on our own national infrastructure as opposed to funding Armed Forces as limited as ours while getting hammered on the sly.
No one thinks Ukraine is totally fine. Russia isn't either. Putin has managed to completely wreck the economies and demographics of 2 countries at the same time, bravo to him
What can be learnt, is what was known decades ago. That ground to air defences are extremely tough to crack. Before the Kuwait campaign (1990-91) NATO had two approaches to this problem. 1) US version - massive saturation attacks with the maximum effort in suppression of air defences. 2) The British approach, sneak in low under the RADAR. The British approach proved suicidal once the target was reached and the aircraft ran into static low-level/short range air defences. That was the end of the British idea. The US spent many weeks systematically destroying Iraq's ground-air defences, using massive overkill in missiles, aircraft and technology. Only after several weeks just dedicated to this, did the allies finally go in on the ground. The Russians went into Ukraine without weeks of preparative bombardment of Ukraine's air defences, no doubt a gamble. It was not the only gamble. The Russians should not have gone in with less than 400,000 troops on the ground and preferably 600,000, but the entire Russian Army was just under 300,000. Contrary to western propaganda, Putin did not, like Hitler built a massive military machine to conquer Europe, but actually slightly reduced the Russian armed forces in size to concentrate on modernisation and upgrading. Under these real conditions, the Russians choose not to throw their aircraft away in suicidal attacks over air space well defended by SAMs etc., but rather to rely on stand-off weapons such as ground launched and air launched long-range missiles and glide bombs. NATO need not be smug about the prospect of facing a well built, strong, integrated air defence system. It is a daunting prospect against a peer or near peer enemy. Even in the case of Qaddafi's Libya, it took considerable effort to reduce the air defences, how much more so against even Iran, let alone Russia. What we have really learnt from this war is that due to advances in technology, the picture in the air is repeated on the ground. All things being equal, the defence is stronger than the attack. Those who concentrate to attack commit suicide, and we are back to something similar to WW1. The battles in eastern Ukraine resemble the Somme. Take note.
Comment better than the video.
Excellent
So Forces News want our troops to be killed for those wishing to conquer us like The EU and The US. Deny this if you like, but look at the state of Great Britain (what a dump)!
I'd seek to have Forces News arrested for foreign propaganda myself (the poor bar-stewards)!
Well said.
You realise Ukraine has and had the largest military in Europe combined. This is peer to peer so we better stop taking notes and start fighting or negotiating because the longer this goes on the worse it gets for the west
Lack of air superiority? In reality Russia have been doing bombing missions almost everyday. FAB 500 anyone? Grom missile? Occasional Kinzhal strikes?
RAF needs to learn how to avoid their own TRIDENT misiles
😁
Uh, that's the Royal Navy
Since when do the RAF have submarine launched ICBMs?
The US and UK use the same missiles, from the same factory and the USA has not had a single failure and test them all the time. My personal guess, the UK took apart the missile, loaded a dummy war head and assembled it back wrong. It's not good but understandable error.
Superiority, inferiority, the calculations are made with mathematics.
US GDP in 2023, according to the IMF, 25,000 billion US dollars.
EU GDP in 2023 according to the IMF 21,000 billion US dollars.
CHN GDP, in 2023 according to the IMF 17,900 billion US dollaes.
RUS GDP 2021 IMF data 1800 billion US dollars.
RUS GDP 2023 IMF data 1200 billion US dollars
RUS GDP 2024 - BANKRUPTCY !!!!
Chihuahua is barking about the Bear...
I’m willing to bet that one of those crucial, and definitely hard to swallow lessons is attrition. None of Europe, UK included, has enough numbers to sustain combat fatigue let alone losses of personnel and equipment.
Perhaps. However, I think a more complex look would probably determine that this won't be as big of an issue as it is in Ukraine.
1. Ukraine is bleeding Russia dry. Russia would need decades (if it was even possible) to rebuild its supplies of tanks, artillery, missiles, etc. personnel, training, etc. to even get back to pre-Ukraine war levels. This might actually be impossible given its demographics, sanctions, etc.
2. NATO countries are only giving (mainly) old stockpiles to Ukraine.
3. Ukraine is able to counter Russian numbers with its more advanced western weapons. Advanced artillery, HIMARs, glide bombs, Patriots, etc. are taking out Russian equipment and personnel at a 5-1 or higher rates. If the Russia faced NATO, NATO would likely to far better.
4. NATO doesn't have many of the disadvantages as Ukraine in a war. It starts with standardized and advanced weapons, more troops, better training, secured areas far from the battle (western Europe, US, Canada, etc.) which can't be conventionally attacked, plus a massive navy, air force, etc. All which can be brought to bear from the start of any war.
5. NATO wouldn't have the restrictions Ukraine is fighting under. It could immediately attack logistics targets deep in Russia, it has a massive border Russia would have to 'defend', etc. Russia can't concentrate air defenses, aircraft, etc. from Finland to Turkey while dealing with attacks from the sea or the US's massive long ranged bombers and aircraft carriers attacking across Russia. It would almost certainly suffer initial loses extremely quick loses.
6. NATO doesn't have to sustain a war against Russia. It can't push troops into a major Russian city as Russia would almost certainly resort to nukes. It is highly unlikely that Russia could sustain even a localize attack into say Poland as NATO would be attacking with long-ranged weapons along it's entire border and can strike rear areas until such an attack fails.
7. Ultimately, even if (by some miracle) Russia were to get hold in say Poland, hold it for a half a year until ammunition supplies ran out, etc. I'm pretty sure a few tactical nukes would remove them.
The bigger lesson of the Ukraine war seems to be that NATO could slaughter Russia so badly in a conventional war (likely within weeks) that it would be best that one never start. Hence, probably better to actually start giving Ukraine more weapons simply to allow it to bleed Russia down to the point that it can't attack any NATO countries.
@@BW022 he still thinks Russia is the power it was before the war started he also misses that the Russian military has proven itself incompetent corrupt and inept and even malicious in its treatment of its own men let alone its Ukrainian victims and the place has promised much wunderwaffen & failures and no shows Su57 T14 etc as to make even the Nazis look embarrassed NATO and western militaries along with the military industrial complexes of the west has gone along with this fraud to feather their own nests. Ukraine if the west keeps giving enough smart weapons will be the undoing of Putin's Russia. Ukraine however must stop fighting the Russians on their terms and up the attrition war and make Putin bleed, give the Russians a meter but make that meter an expensive nightmare.
@BW022 OK some of what you says true to a certain extent but ruSSia wouldn't last 48hrs , as Nato would use a conventional bombing run and would knockout any of ruSSias conventional forces .
@@adriansheldon7778Interesting way to put it but let us entertain the point. It is one of those things that is again easier said than done. Who exactly are the ones going after the Russian assets with conventional weapons again? I get a little unconfortable about the idea.
Returning to the premise of this comment thread, there are countries in Europe that can sustain combat for a prolonged time, but that is not fun at all for those doing it and the internet commenters out there might consider a little bit what they are getting us into.
@@herptek when putin first started his nuke rhetoric he was phoned up by Biden and was told that if they let off just tactical nuke their military would be bombed back into the stone age .
The west : Russia's air defence is not so good .
Russia: then send your planes .
The West : sorry 😂
It seems incredible that our species is still spending all our time and money developing ways to kill each other. That we have this ability to learn and pass-on our knowledge, but our priorities are so ridiculous. 😢
The mainstay of Ukrainian airdefence for the 10 months and beyond was the refurbed soviet era s300, and the buks and Tors ,
In fact that only started to go south when ukraine started running out of soviet era missiles ( and ukraine used to make missiles for the s300,)
Ukraine had more air-defence in service than any other European state , and that after they lost a good proportion in crimea in 2014
you are drunk again?
Hahaha 🤣 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
But in future wars I think airplanes with pilots are obsolete. The future of air defense are not missiles, it's laser or EMP. imagine 70 Nato warplanes crossed Russian border on the west and for defense Russia used 6 emp devices near the border. Which resulting 70 confused Nato pilots losing control of their airplane and initially losing all the airplanes like its been hacked.
@@Ghostjohare556 dnt watch too many sci fi movies
@@jordzbuenafe6239 Soviet have 10x more AA weapon than usa
how long will west take to understand Rambo was only a movie.
What does that have to do with this video?!
how long before russian bot stop, when Putin gone
There must be a two-seat version of the Tempest. As a platform that will control many assets and lead asymmetrical strike packages, the workload on a single pilot will be too high. It will also enable it to be a significant wide-area SEAD platform
I thought the goals of these modern fully connected planes is the headquarter have full situation awareness and can help set-up/coordinates everything.
We should be thinking 7th gen and that almost certainly won’t have a human on board.
It's cute that you think there will still be meat bags flying planes in the future.
Automation drives down the pilot workload to making just the tactical decisions that only a human can take.
@ 2:20 - That "Flight Computer" is spectacular, no electric power/batteries are needed... 🤙
That's how backwards Russia is
@@baggablisssimmo7559 - With all fairness any pilot will tell you that E6-b is the most accurate flight computer in the world, but if it’s your only equipment to navigate nowadays is pretty bad.
tell that to the people in Ukraine who are left now to their own devices.
Honestly. Who makes this stuff up? The title is just laughable 🤦🏻
Love the slide rules.
They should be learning our pitiful numbers will result in the RAF quickly going extinct in the event of a major war! They should also be learning the value of air defence suppression capabilities, something the RAF inexplicably no longer has. Are the lessons being learned though? I doubt it.
They said that about the RAF until is smashed the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain. Keep supporting our troops though - you're a great morale boost.
go join the RAF and im sure that we will have all this. The reason the military is reducing in numbers is simply becuase we arnt recruiting enough sailers, airmen and soldiers. The country is too woke to have a military and this is the main issue.
@@billsmith-hl8rkmodern fighter jets like the F-35 or F-18 and so on cannot be mass produced like old WW2 planes, theyre simply too complex. This is a huge factor as Britain cannot match Russia's capacity to produce jets
"The country is too woke to have a military" what does that mean, are you guys not getting enough sleep? 🤣 @@ashleygoggs5679
So does that mean that a mid-sized country doesn't have the capabilities to fight an ultramodern war? Too much equipment needed, too many different kinds of equipment, too expensive, can't rebuild supply fast enough during a war.
Who are the UK to talk about anything, really.
The Russians are freely operating above front lines atm
Things are easier said than done.
Russia just to Avdiivka relying primarily on complete air superiority. Suffered 1 loss of plane, with over 250 ground strikes concluded. Just saying they dont have air superiority wont make them magically not have it
In 10 days, the Russian Air Force has lost its tenth warplane, including Sukhoi Su-34 and Su-35 fighter jets, and a critical asset, the A-50 Beriev ‘flying radar.’
@@ScentlessSun yeah, it was actually 100 airplanes in 3 days with 0 confirmations or evidence that they like to post so much
This point has been overstated. As usual in life, it's more important to do than to watch. You can get off on watching, but you don't get a feel for it.
Russia treats war like a chess match And not delustional like nato
We shouldn't rest on our laurels here. I think the British MOD manufacturing industry should be going into full head on production. Especially in the missile and ammo sector to help out the Ukrainians and boost the British economy via taxes etc. it's a no brainer to me, but then again I'm only a shop floor worker not a whistle and flute. I'm sure we should keep the faith in those people at the top that know what's best and when.
At least Britain is a small country, which makes it easier to defend with less equipment.
The Brit’s need to get their damn ships in order. Produce more destroyers and subs. Produce smaller aircraft carriers and get your damn colonies back
Well said.
people at the top in britain?? what you mean those morons in parliament.
@Huppy1234567 tf you talking about " get your colonies back " explain.
The RAF needs lots of cheap fighters as well something Grippenesque so that they can train and have larger nrs of pilots with lots of hours and aircraft that can support the 5th & 6th gen aircraft.
There is not any 6th gen fighter in service anywhere in world.
@@igorkratka I don't think they mean current aircraft when they mention 6th gen, they mean Tempest/GCAP which is intended as Britain, Italy, and Japan's prospective 6th gen replacement for things like the Typhoon in British and Italian service and the F-2 in Japanese service, while complementing the 5th gen F-35.
The idea that we need both an advanced 5th/6th gen fighter and a more numerous low cost but agile fighter isn't that radical, the US did it with the F-16 when the F-15 was beefed up to be extremely capable and multi-mission but the costs crept up, the F-16 focused on being light and excelling at dogfighting, while the F/A-18 that was derived from the YF-17 eventually replaced the amazingly capable F-14.
There's something to be said for having the absolute most advanced fighter, but having the numbers to be able to assign to tasks that don't require the absolute cutting edge saves the advanced airframes from excessive wear and ensures you have enough to avoid a lack of numbers due to maintenance or attrition.
@@G1NZOU Sounds like the IAF made a sound decision placing an order for 223 Tejas Mk1A and further thinking of placing an order of 180 Tejas Mk2. Light fighters are indeed important. They free up the heavy hitters to do the heavy hitting.
@@death_parade Definitely.
Same with our Navy, it's good having very advanced destroyers and frigates but it would be good to have some more general purpose frigates, or some corvettes that are more capable than our river class offshore patrol boats, to bulk out our hulls and cover more areas on patrol.
Thanks for this👌
We learn that our advance anti air cannot even stop drones that powered by moped engine.
And even if it could stop a single drone with an old Honda Civic engine in it.....those advanced air defence systems won't be able to stop 100 drones made of fibreglass and plywood with old Honda Civic engines in them.
@@drmodestoesqdont need advanced systems. Gepard works well on slow drones
@@NoName-md5zbexactly...manpads and geppards easily take out drones with bike engines, they move slowly and are noisy...easy to spot.
The Gepard and its replacements Skyshield and Skynex are more than capable in stopping Shaheeds. Against a smaller drone swarm is another matter.
Well, it can and it has been in the Red sea, it's just not sustainable.
That aircraft are extremely vulnerable to modern ground missles?
The poor Ukrainian soldiers in Avdeyevka that received dozens of FAB-500 are reassured. They could have received hundreds. The illusion that the English have of still representing something on the military level is comical.
600+ FAB 500
@@taibro3868 I read somewhere that the English land army is less numerous than the Ramzan Kadyrov army alone. I don't know if it is true.
there's no such thing as an English army toto.......try and get at least one fact right....LOL@@toto241100
YOU ARE SPOT ON!!!! What a dumb incompetent and weak nation. And this is due to no fault to our people.
It means MSM copium for the western Joe Public. If Russia places S 400 no nato plane will go near them. Western air superiority is only against underdeveloped countries 🌟🌟
Thanks. ✌🏻👊🏼
Personally I think the biggest warning we can glean from this is to make sure that our equipment is ready to go at short notice, if we mothball equipment or don't fund it well enough, will we be stuck like Russia with a large portion of our equipment needing spare parts and not being able to bring our full force to bear quickly.
We managed to do it in the Falklands though even that wasn't without errors, it's important we have enough aircraft to manage when a portion of them are out of action for maintenance, and it's important to have enough hulls in the Royal Navy to ensure we have the ones we need available for operations even when some are in refit.
Nice to read from all of you military experts. All of whom I assume have actually been to war!
innit honeslty our biggest weakness is left wing western propoganda that makes us seem weak where in reality we are not
I have never been to the moon , but I know I cant get there without a space ship !
but if you were given the actual opportunity who will be effective? An experienced astronaut who had some missions or some idiot like you?@@kizzyp2735
It's called learning. You watch enough and learn. You don't need to go to war to learn how to fire a gun and aim.
your answer shows your ignorance. *Its got nothing to do with firing guns. It''s all about planning, briefings. The fact that you never know what may be waiting for you and the carrying out of the missions. If you have not done it you have no idea about aprehensions that exist and I suspect you have never put your life on the plate for anything. You cannot learn that. Our Forces have done it quite a lot in recent times.@@asavelakuse6865
A slide rule at 02:20?
Yep, that's how old Russian equipment is
The Grippen is the ideal platform for the war that's happening right now, small, cheap (ish), connected, can call anywhere a base and is easily and quickly re armed, refueled or fixed.
Add in your air dominance stealth fighters to take out the enemy aircraft but these too need to be able able to operate out of any scrap of land available.
Then land based air defense, lots of it.
Large weapons such as tanks, and boats are now sitting ducks without their own drones for scouting, electronic counter measures and point defense that isn't easily overwhelmed or quickly runs out of expensive hard to replace ammo.
Yes, it's a good platform.
I need 250,000 tonnes of fuel, 100,000 rockets, 250 tanks, 500,000 soldiers etc. Submarines are the thing that won ww2. The uboats had the allies on their knees early on. Planes did not win the war, cutting supply did or the stopping of supply cuts did.
Sweden seems incredibly pragmatic when it comes to defence equipment, they knew they wanted something agile and dependable without trying to bloat the project and making it too expensive.
Planes and ships mean a lot less in this age of versatile rockets.
Greatings from Finland here.
What I have noticed in this air warfare is the movement towards drones and very effective small scale airwarfare. Away from million dollar fighter jets. The million dollar jets and air defence systems have somehow put each other in a check mate position and cheap small arm drones have been of more importance.
It's the big planes with their FABs that are making the difference now, though...
The Russians do not yet have stealth technology. The USAF realized decades ago that stealth technology was necessary combined with electronic warfare and SEAD to defeat modern SAM defenses.. The Su-57 is at an advanced prototype trials stage and only flies propaganda missions.
@@williamzk9083 Where did the US encounter modern intergrated air defenses to date? And don't forget that they lost 10.000 planes and helicopters in Vietnam...
@@namulit The US did better over Hanoi than Russia did over Kyiv even before Western armament arrived. The reality is that Russia is behind the US, China. All it has is big expensive aircraft that are all show and no go.
It's so funny to read sometimes that Americans have some kind of stealth technology that no one sees
" *Always remember they show you what they want you to see , Its better if your enemy underestimates you.* "
That's a good advice when you're at peace, but the moment you go to war you must unleash the beast. Or you are saying Russia are losing soldiers on purpose?
@@ameunier41Russia didn't use any of it's advanced stuff during the beginning of the war, they literally just started using them and they are also upgrading their equipment based on the battle field performance.
I recon they are more advanced than the us now in many military tech.
Adapt and overcome, America never fought a modern military so you also overestimate your equipment.
But Russia is getting first hand data on performance and what thwy can discard and upgrade.
@@ameunier41 in every conflict since time immemorial, it'd taken Russia 3yrs to get on the war footing and show up. Russia is in this for 15-20yrs, and their whole thing is, use up the old cr*p first.
@@CHRAXY Much of the US equipment has proven itself to be very capable without the need for massive losses in order to "discard and upgrade"
@@StephenJohnson-jb7xeNot the Abrams that got smoked, nor the Javelins which the T90s adapted, nor Himars which Russians jammed
Fighter pilot in "Manned aircraft still vitally important" shock!
Good article thank you ❤
While I realize it's stock footage, but man, what's a crew member using a slide ruler for at 2:20?
All pilots use some sort of whiz wheel/slide ruler, because..what if?
@@class2instructor32 What if the slide ruler slips unreachable behind / under the seat during some high g maneuver?
That's called EMP proofing. Come a pulse? American pilots will be totally lost.
@@thepaperboy9009 should be in your kneebord
It's quicker to use than a calculator if you know how
Establishing air superiority against a near peer adversary with sophisticated surface to air missiles systems (SAMs) is nearly impossible. This is why both sides are heavily dependent on artillery systems and drones, its to compansate for compromised air power. America has invested a lot in stealth tech, however it's never been tested against first world adversaries, its one thing to establish air superiority in a place like Afghanistan, Iran and Malawi. Doing it China would be a completely different cattle of fish.
that's why they established a testing ground between po and ru.
Then what explains that unimpressive campaign against Houthi’s? Houthi hide their air defense which made the US unable to degrade them which is making air superiority difficult. And the drones are targeting the ships. It only takes one to sink a hundred millions dollar ship.
The Serbs downed a high tech Stealth plane when NATO attacked Serbia. Imagine how many the Russians will bring down!
@thambomathambo • "cattle" of fish or "kettle" of fish?
@@yvonnetomenga5726 oops
Unfortunately Russia has the time to adapt too. Changes, especially regarding drones, are bound to arrive.
They're already outproducing Ukraine in weaponized drones, according to Ukrainian sources. Russia has a quantitative advantage in every aspect of the conflict, except for propaganda.
Adapting is not the Russian's forte.
@@penguinista Tell that to the red army who got pushed back to moscow and still won
@@ACE-fd4nhThat wasn't the Russian's, that was the weather. They don't call it "General Winter" for nothing.
@@ACE-fd4nh You should maybe get acquinted with the war before making claims like that.
Bro lol in avdivka russians had a 50 fabs per day ratio and you say no Air superiority?
Before I met British propaganda, I thought Kremlin TV was the champion in lying! They are amateurs compared to the BBC and others!
Those fabs make big boom but are quite inaccurate, they can be dropped like 50km from the target. If they had control over the skies they would fly all over Ukraine held territory, they don't, they get as close tot he front as they can, and either get shoot down or drop inaccurate bombs from far away. Russia lost another A50 today. Go look up that aircraft, that thing flies far from the front, even there they are not safe. Not exactly "air superiority".
russia dropped 700,000 lbs of bombs on avdiivka so keep coping@@MissMan666
The Russians can have Air superiority only when BBC says so!
Did I see someone use a slide-rule?! (at 2:20) I haven't used one for probably 45 years
Yes that shot is so precious they had to splice it in from a diff airplane for effect lol
Every nation's crews supposedly have those, in the case of hacking or EMP, but the Russkis also insist on knowing how to use them.
Yes, you did! I'd have expected an E6B but it's rare to see a straight slide rule these days.
Russian tech.
What does RAF want to learn .Britan forces are not what they used to be much less what they want to portray they are..
Who said Russia doesnt have Air superiority? The west and Ukraine themselves have said it
Did i just see someone using a slide rule? How far back do you want to go?
Every nation's crews supposedly have those, in the case of hacking or EMP or other "surprises", but the Russkis also insist on knowing how to use them.
Not even an E6B but a straight rule. Go figure.
Thought Russians using washing machine chips.. no secret! Lol 😂
Stop spending billions. Build cheap drones, instead. That’s the real lesson learned in Ukraine
1:10- Russian air defense may not have the missiles to complete full coverage. Any non-critical missile attack may just be let through to save interceptors for higher priority targets.
3:11- Yes. MOAR WEAPONS! Not having air dominance means no strategic surprise, which means heavy casualties. It also means stalemate and WWI conditions. The Desert Storm adage is still true- "If you can see it you can hit it. If you can hit it, you can kill it." And, with drones, everybody can see EVERYTHING.
Lol in that clip (I assume is a Russian navigator) using a slide rule! Good fallback if the computer fails….lol
Where are all Ukranian jets and helicopters? Ukraine had hundreds two years ago 😅
Russia is playing chess with you.
The Patriot missile systems air defence will help Ukraine significantly
Channels like this are misleading 😂😂😂.The war is in Ukraine and the destruction is too much
Can somebody see the paradox here, this guy is talking about one or two occasions Ukraine got a little bit of success using storm shadow missiles in Crimea that was only possible after Ukraine overwhelmed the air defense system with drones strike that were shooting down by the air defense system. Since almost every single Storm shadow missile has been shot down and nobody talks about it anymore. This guy fell to talk about how Russia destroyed most Ukraine patriot systems with kinzhal strikes. The patriot system now is hiding in some basement in Ukraine to wait only when Russia is using its aircraft and get them out of the basement to shoot Russian airplanes and go back to the hidden spot. No patriot system could stay outside in Ukraine to monitor the sky otherwise they will be destroyed by the Russians.
@kirikoo9981 There is no evidence whatsoever that ’almost every single’ Storm Shadow has been shot down, quite the opposite, or that any Patriot battery has been ’destroyed’ or even damaged by any Kinzhal apart from one radar slightly damaged (as Kinzhal is a ballistic missile it’s pretty easy to shoot down). To keep your AA systems safe from enemy strikes is a good thing, the Russians still haven’t learnt that. How many Russian aircraft have been shot down in the last week?
So there is no paradox. Russia’s airpower simply isn’t that good, they still don’t have air superiority, and their AA systems are nowhere near as effective as we thought whereas Western systems work as well as was expected. Technologically, Russia is far behind.
@@uniformmike05 ok good, why the US went to Germany, Poland, Japan asking to send their patriot system to Ukraine after Russia claimed he destroyed them Ukraine, why the US asking the Kiev regime to put in jail any Ukrainian who online any video that show the destruction of the air defense system. All of these measures are to give you free hand to lies and deny everything while you're busy asking for air defense to feel the gap.
@@uniformmike05 If you are writing comments here, it means you have access to the internet. While you are at it, could you look up the Kinzhal missile, I think you urgently need to update your 'knowledge base about it!'
@@njikangclifford8259 The Kinzhal is just a ballistic missile (a Tochka-U) launched from an aircraft and being ballistic, it’s quite easy to shoot down.
The problem is so are we.😢
Cheap drones can easily flood expensive AA systems.
Is that why your tridents are falling all over the sea😂
I wonder what Russia has learned from our own incompetence.
It's not even in the same league as Russian incompetence. For decades Russia has claimed to be a tier 1 power only to be humbled and embarrassed by a tiny nation with little resources.
@@neilw.3012 if you believe that then you are the kind of fool who would believe in god and the world being flat. Russia was determined to have this 'war' won in days. Weeks at the most. But you think they are intentionally dragging this out... Killing more soldiers, destroying valuable resources and spending billions they don't have to while looking like utter incompetent fools on the world stage! Sure.
@@neilw.3012or maybe you are roozkee bot, made in 2021😂 get lost. i reported you
@@neilw.3012why would they do that?
@@neilw.3012 if you truly believe that then you are the kind of fool who would believe in god and the earth being flat. Russia was determined to have this 'war' won in days, weeks at the most. But you are saying that Russia is intentionally dragging this out... Killing thousands of soldiers, destroying valuable resources and spending billions they don't need to while making themselves look like incompetent fools on the world stage! Sure.
Russian missiles also penetrated western air defence system in Ukraine
And that is why trident test failed 2 times in a row 😒 which is in service since 1970’s and we still haven’t figured out how to fire it.
Edit : and both of the aircraft carriers are out for service with problems again and again. That’s how we know it is difficult. it’s easy to say these things but defence systems are difficult and not the complete solution. You are using a million dollar or half a million dollar missile to neutralise a 25000$ bomb. You have been fighting with nations who had little to no military training 0 adaptability capacity and 0 weapons know ho. how do we sit here and predict what will happen. Russia is out of missiles since 2022 as per our media’s reports but still they are sending 100’s.
Every weapon sent to Ukraine means less risk from Russia.
risk from what you fool?
Putin invading the whole of Europe is pure made up propaganda and hyperbole
Are you that dumb? LOL
are you serious! every weapon sent to ukraine is prolonging their suffering, already russia wanted to talk it was the west that pushed them to keep fighting. those eu globalists want there money! and as for an unprovoked war russia has been antagonised since before 2014 by western forces in ukraine.... west funded assassinations for starters.
Silly illlogical comment! The West is very busy building up its weapons stocks.This oftem means older weapons sent elsewhere are replaced with much more technologically advanced ones. It is especially useful for the West to see exactly how Russian weapons perform and are utilised against the Western ones sent to Ukraine.
Risk from Russia? The only risk to any of us is from the US and it's corrupt, sychophantic vasals in Europe, the UK being the the worst of them. Stop watching 'the news' 🤦🏻
West have lost the war. Reason russiN did not fly early in war . Cause of s 300 and other soviet missile. Russian has adapted to it . They are hitting fab 1000 pounds .
A US Intel report from last week said Russia is producing 250k missiles a month while NATO is only producing 50k Per Month, and Russia is only using 100k missile per month.
Meaning the longer NATO wait, the more missiles Russia will have.
And if you wanna know why China had that Water-missile scandal it's because China has an extremely Aggressive goal to have 1.4 Billion Medium to long range missiles by 2030 (Almost Impossible) But Considering there has been 150 Million Playstation 2, Nintendo Switch, and Nintendo DS sold, I'm sure China could reach that 1.4 Billion mark.
They would be capable of swarming a barrage of missiles at any US Offensive target and still have a few hundred million missiles remaining.
All talk until an actual battle happens
Did I actually see aircrew using a slide rule?
Yes, why not?
6th generation airforce technology!
No replacement for the old school when technology fails, when I did officer aircrew aptitude tests some of the tests involved doing mathematics in your head and working out estimates for distance of fuel usage, keeping those skills alive is important.
When Apollo 13 encountered difficulties and had to shut down their fuel cells, meaning they had to shut down nearly all their systems, their return burn required manual calculation and a mechanical watch to time the burn.
@@G1NZOUThe Apollo missions carried slide rules aboard too. Picket N600 pocket rules, specifically; they can be seen in a few photos.
Do ground troops still use bayonets? If someone is using a slide rule, it means he can manage it well! It's the results that matter. When 20K weapons take down multimillion dollar equipment, you don't ask questions about the cost difference.
There isn't much tech in shovels and washing machine microchips.
The UK Armed Forces are too small now, Russia will just sacrifice what ever they need to until we have been bleed out of resources which due to successive government short-sightedness, won't take very long
What is that stick in pilots hands @2:20
The month of October saw a significant increase in the intensity of air to air engagements over Ukraine, which according to multiple assessments has been unprecedented since the initial weeks of full scale Russian-Ukrainian hostiles from February 2022. From October 13-23 Russian forces shot down 17 MiG-29 fighters - a fighter class which Ukraine operated in large numbers when the conflict broke out and has acquired more units of since. The MiG-29 is one of three fighter classes widely used by Ukrainian forces, alongside the heavier Su-27 air superiority fighter and the Su-24M strike fighter, with all three having been inherited in considerable numbers when the Soviet Union disintegrated. While Su-27s participated in major air battles in the war’s first month in early 2022, numbers have since dwindled while the MiG-29 fleet until October remained relatively large. This has been a result of both the greater numbers of MiGs Ukraine inherited, as well as the fact that the class was operated by allied states namely Poland and Slovakia which between the donated an estimated 33 of the aircraft - supplementing over 50 that were already in service in Ukraine.
Although Ukraine has surprised observes with its ability to operate heavyweight Su-27 and Su-24M fighters from makeshift airfields across the country, the MiG-29 is perhaps the best optimised fighter class in the world to such ‘guerrilla airfield’ operations and requires relatively little maintenance and very short airstrips to be able to fly. This has made the fighter class highly prized by clients across the world, from North Korea and India in Asia to Algeria and Sudan in Africa among over a dozen others. When entering service in 1982 the MiG-29 was unrivalled in its manoeuvrability and benefitted from the ability to target enemy aircraft within visual ranges at very extreme angles using helmet mounted sights - which testing in Germany after the Cold War showed provided an overwhelming advantage over Western aircraft. Although formidable for its time, Ukraine’s MiG-29s have faced a significant disadvantage in air to air combat when facing the elite of the Russian Air Force - namely MiG-31BM/BSM interceptors, Su-35 air superiority fighters, and even Su-57 stealth fighters which although deployed in limited numbers have been widely reported to have participated in air to air engagements.
The Russian Air Force has relied particularly heavily on its Su-35s to tackle Ukrainian fighters, with the aircraft continuing to be acquired in large numbers by the Russian Air Force and designed for air to air combat against far more formidable targets than those in Ukraine’s inventory. Not only is the Su-35 a significantly more modern fighter, using a phased array radar and 21st century avionics against Ukraine’s 1980s combat aircraft, but it is also from a much higher weight range meaning it can carry significantly greater firepower, larger sensors, and heavier longer ranged R-37M air to air missiles which have over triple the range of the R-27s carried by the MiGs. Although modern MiG-29 variants such as the MiG-29M could pose a challenge to Su-35s in air to air combat, the ageing Soviet-built variants used by Ukraine are effectively obsolete and have not seen their capabilities significantly improved since the 1980s. The Su-35’s main combat strengths include its extreme manoeuvrability, triple radars and extreme engagement range, which are not currently seen on any Western fighter classes. Having been widely used in combat in Ukraine, the aircraft were first allocated to an aggressor training unit in September 2022 reportedly to impart experience from the Ukrainian theatre. Deploying from airfields in both Russia and Belarus, the fighter class’ most widely praised engagement was its reported victory over Su-27s over Ukraine’s Zhytomyr region during which four of the older jets were shot down for no Russian losses. The way Su-35s have been deployed indicates it is not unlikely that the bulk of the MiG-29s shot down in recent air to air engagements were engaged by the aircraft.
Source Military Watch Magazine
And it originates from Iran.
Military Watch magazine is a pro-Russian source and has a record of heavy bias, nearly always reporting distorted figures.
Ukraine desperately needs those F-16s, spare airframes and parts from Poland and Slovakia definitely helped bolster their MiG-29 fleet but eventually attrition takes its toll.
And while the F-16s will help, Ukraine also needs continual support for their air defence so that F-16s can operate at the best advantage they can get against foes like the Su-35.
What we've known for decades... Russia's all smoke and mirrors.
Really? They are triumphant and NATO is a joke. Greetings from a Swedish guy that respect and like Putin and the Russians very much. You can shove yours up the alley.
One main take away I see is supply. The NATO and western nations can fights a short quick war, but anything prolonged and vast is concerning. The amount of shelling and ground forces required is difficult. New tech like drones are a big game changer, however, the war is of attrition.
Those are the guys giving Ukraine the bad advice while they are enjoying the good life. They said the same about Afganistan before they were kicked out with tails between their legs. Billions of dollars of war equipment left behind.
go back to the Hindoukoush.
Well, Trump removed the coalition forces. I'm not sure if that qualifies as what you are implying. Trying to fight what is essentially a civilian military is never a great idea, as is being demonstrated in Palestine as we speak.
Trump made a peace deal to not attack the Taliban (which didn't include the Afghan government in negotiations), then removed a bunch of troops before enough equipment had been moved out.
A really bad call that put both Biden's administration and the remaining British forces in SNAFU.
We weren't kicked out, we simply had no choice but to hurry up to leave before the last of our troops were mobbed by civilians clinging to our transport aircraft. It was not the RAF's fault what happened in Afghanistan, they did the best they could with a crappy situation.
West runs out of ammunition faster than a Ferrari of fuel.
as will North Korea
The west has plenty but politicians are slow walking or blocking delivery in many cases
Russia \has had to go to Iran and North Korea to buy ammunition too so Russia is no different. Don't be a clown.
And Russia doesn't seem to running out cannon fodder in it's population.
@@drscopeify well if North Korean ammo is of such a low quality that RuZZians are afraid to use it, it speaks volumes.
Just don't talk about GPS jamming though, especially excalibur rounds...
RAF + USAF = 🌎☮️
I think the RAF better start making white flags and learning Russian.
When do we ever surrender British never surrenders
@@Nathann99 Since you asked, the Fall of Singapore. It's known as the largest British surrender in history.
Outnumbered and outgunned and nobody’s dying or losing legs for rishi sunak or his mates. They days are gone.
lack of air superiority? i am wondering how they launch the FAB bomb, ah ofc with a shovels
Of late, Russia has made heavy use of modified FABs, which glide to their target and thanks to their much-improved range, can be released from a safe distance. That said, Ukraine just downed three Su-34s, the workhorse for such attacks. Maybe Russia got overconfident and left off the mod kits.
The bombers come in very low and then go sharply upward to about 12-18k feet. Then they jink and dive back down below radar coverage to escape the SAMs. Sometimes it works, but apparently it isn't working too well at avoiding Patriot missiles now that there's a battery somewhere in SE Ukraine.
No@@peabasenot confirmed russian planes loses.
@@marioceva7163 I believe the Russians admitted one lost aircraft, but still haven't picked up the courage to credit the Ukrainian air defences with the kill. No surprises there.
Been listening to these guys from the Officers Club bar waffling on about how crude / superior the Russian / Wests equipment is . Scalpel ? I'd answer Khinzal and Zircon ? . We won't mention the 'Titanic' Challenger and Abrams tanks ,made their debut and literally sank or went up in smoke . . . Keep it up guys , this one is a lost cause . . but onwards and upwards ,eh ?
Its easy to establish air superiority when there is no air defense. What do you do if you cant?
Yes this is how we learn. and adapt
Sunak can learn who daddy is!
Lack of air superiority?
They have air superiority by the front for crying out loud 😂😂
If Russia had achieved air superiority they would have won by now.
Russia uses ballistic missiles so the RAF needs to develop air defense like patriot ASAP
SCALP is not an ordinary missile and Russia is not going to waste their precious S400 missiles defending nothing! Also, no one has ever been able to understand Russia, that is one thing we can count on.
Absurd. Britain didn't have air superiority in the Falklands. Since when was it a golden rule?
Ideally Britain would have liked to have had air superiority.
Though considering the circumstance, we did manage to force the majority of the Argentine air power back to the mainland, so there's at least that.
they made air superiority, they took it with them.
@@grandrapids57 No, mate. The landings were made under hostile skies. I think you know that. And, if you don't, go and watch the video.
@@blazeobaggins5228 That is correct but they also made air superiority, but they had to bring it with them and send it on the longest bombing mission up to that time. They didn't have it until sometime after they arrived.
@@grandrapids57 Men died on ships that were bombed in the open.
Black Buck was a failure. The vulcan missed, it just happens to be that a single bomb landed on the runway out of sheer dumb luck, and that didn't ensure any safety at the landing site. And the Harrier didn't have a radar equipped, it relied on the fleet for targeting because it was designed for fleet defence and not air superiority.
Only after the landings were completed did they install surface to air but, that's after the invasion, and those rapiers didn't even work.
In fact, the entire thing was more of a miracle than a succesful operation. Point is, they went anyway so, it's not a golden rule.
I think this video is confused by the fact that America likes picking fights with nations that don't have an air force.
If Russia doesn't have air superiority, what up with the dozens of FAB500 strikes a day? Or is that in the "classified" file?
It helps when Avdiivka is only about 90 miles from the Russian border
Of course they have. The western propaganda machine lies on.
7 planes were shot down in a week, russia lost 216 battle pilots in two years and a lot of war planes and helicopters. Even A50 was shot down. How it is air superiority?
@@Valtifacs I find it a bit odd that Ukraine claim 7 shoot downs in the week after Adviika has fallen. Meanwhile the Ukraine air force has been almost non existent for quite a while now.
@@Hereford1642 Well even russian confermed this and there is a lot of video - just search. Our millitary don't open all their secrets to common folks so ofcourse you don't understand how it wsa done and having your douts. But this is how it is.
The RAF can learn the difference between air supremacy and air superiority.
Lack of air superiority 😂😂😂😂what you smoking
Russian cruise missiles have also been hitting Ukraine in large numbers, Ukraine is also using a large number of the same AA systems as Russia, neither of them have air superiority or have been able to operate with impunity.
Maybe Russia/Ukraine need to step up their SEAD to get any number of aircraft over the battlefield.
This one I'm confused about honestly... I feel like Russia really hasn't used those missiles effectively, wouldn't it be better to use those missiles against the military on the front lines to soften them up before sending in tanks and infantry men to capture those lines? Just curious what others think.
ruZZia's ability to launch multiple simultaneous missile & drone attacks is undeniable, Ukraine's interception of the same is limited by the lack of sufficient AD cover either foreign or soviet, that and the fact that ruZZia in true war crime style likes to concentrate on soft civilian targets.
So what's your point?
But they don't kneed to do that, because that is not the war they are fighting.
@@tricky1581 Sorry was there a question in all that rhetoric?
@@supershayloman961 Russia doesn't have great real time intel, by the time they've got a location on enemy forces they've moved on, easier for them to strike buildings with cruise missiles.
Don't blame us for building a counter for what you say you have even though you dont.
It shows how effective Russian made S-300 are. That is the secret.
The UA had one of the best integrated AD systems in the world. Why would anybody think you can get air supremacy in days?
Even in Iraq, facing almost nothing, it took months of preparation to get air supremacy.
The shoot-down rate of the Russian Air Defense has been absolutely phenomenal, even though this guy pooh poohs it.
The UA shoot down rates are also phenomenal, but imaginary.
You one super jet flew over Yemen (the Houthi) once, landed and now routed back to UK for repair? What happen old chap; what lesson did you learn there!
The Brit always talking a bunch of nonsense is shame about about all their failures .
Ukraine's #1 air defence system since the beginning of the conflict has been the S-300. Yes they've received a few Patriot systems but the S-300 has been their mainstay. Now that Ukraine is short on S-300s they've really struggled and are losing lots of ground ever since the fall of Avdiivka. The S-300 is an old Soviet system but very effective. Now Russia has tons of S-400s which are regarded by many in the west and the global south as tip of the spear. The Indians have purchased lots of them as have the Turks.
What is the S-500?
The UK doesn’t even have air superiority over Leicestershire….
What lack of air superiority? You haven't heard of the Adveevka or Krynky FAB drops?
The Russians just lost another A-50. So much for air superiority…
@@uniformmike05 This time it's completely over
@@agathius3969 For Russia? Possibly but not likely. It was ”all over” after they captured Bakhmut too but the only result of that was a Russian army incapable of anything for six months due to crippling losses. You know what a Pyrrhic victory is, right? They lost 20-30k KIA (voenkor Murz claimed 16k) in five months capturing a ruined Avdiivka, they lost ~15k KIA in 10 years in Afghanistan and we know how that ended. Ukrainian estimates of casualties seem more and more like pretty accurate estimates.
So, unfortunately this isn’t ”all over,” not by a long shot. This war will go on until Russia quits. If that will be in 2024, 2025 or further in the future, we don’t know. They’re going to continue trying to advance and suffer huge casualties, their economy will keep deteriorating and their equipment will be lost in huge numbers. Ukraine won’t quit. Why would they? Why should they?
@@uniformmike05well said.
@@uniformmike05 20-30k where are you pulling these numbers from thin air, according to BBC mediozona Russia lost 3,700 soldiers capturing Avdivka (this was from whole frontline nit just Avdivka ) and has obly lost confirmed by name 71,000 and at most 110,000 and economy? Their economy is growing, inflation dropping and military ecports still over 50b despite sanctions.